Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
Support MFO
Donate through PayPal
Remarkable Track Record: David Winters And The Wintergreen Fund
There's no question that Wintergreen is a fine fund. A question is whether it would have been worth following the manager. Since the article used 1/3/5 year performance figures, we can compare his performance over those periods vs. the world stock funds at his former employer - Franklin Mutual:
Fund 1 year 3 year 5 year WGRNX 9.97% 9.60% 0.40% Wintergreen MDISX 19.82% 7.45% 1.25% Mutual Global Discovery MQIFX 17.39% 7.51% 1.25% Mutual Quest
All data from M*, which also shows Wintergreen's current portfolio to be large cap growth - the other funds have kept their portfolios in the value column. This is not necessarily a bad thing - undervalued companies that improve their balance sheets may evolve into growth companies. But it does highlight a difference in the companies you're buying now if you buy shares of the fund.
As the article notes, Wintergreen's fees are quite high - this is why, though the company invests in some good dividend-paying companies (as indicated in the article), the fund's yield is nevertheless zero - all those dividends are going toward paying the fund's expenses.
Good fund? No doubt. Value fund? Maybe. Worth the high cost? Much less clear.
I too have been thinking about cutting back due to the expenses creating a large hurdle to overcome. What alternatives do people use for a deep value global fund?
I trimmed WGRNX in my portfolio. Like I have said so many times, WHEN you buy is ALWAYS more important than WHAT you buy. I sold in one brokerage, bought lesser amount in another.
Unlike his "mentor" Michael Price, Mr. Winters and his fund directors have provided very poor fund stewardship by not significantly reducing the expenses paid by investors as the fund has grown to the current $1.6B AUM. And his initial and current management fee of 1.5% is dope-smoking crazy high. I would give this fund an "F" for fund stewardship and I would not buy this fund under any circumstance.
As for an attractive "deep value" global fund, the closest thing we own is SGIIX which continues to produce. The only NL, low minimum way to access this fund is to buy SGENX-LW at Schwab.
A more growthy global fund to consider would be LSWWX, which has a bond sleeve managed by Dan Fuss.
Where did Anne Guedefin go? (not sure of the spelling) I think she co-managed one of the mutual (european, shares or discovery). I know someone mentioned it somewhere on the forum or in the commentary - just can't locate it.
I know someone is going to squawk that I am not comparing apples-to-apples, but as a fund owner that switched from WGRNX to SFGIX at first opportunity, I could not help myself...please forgive me:
And, forgive me for this: I looked to see if J.R. BRANDSTRADER was a paid shill for WGRNX, but could find nothing implicating on internet.
In addition to the high ER of WGRNX, the fund's holdings really turn me off: 4 out of the top 10 stock positions are tobacco companies. I couldn't hold my nose and buy this one even though I have no socially-conscious funds in any of my accounts.
There were some discussions in the press at times of Wintergreen's flexibility and comparisons to a hedge fund here-and-there, but I never got that in the slightest (it's never displayed a grand degree of flexibility, and has only rarely ever shorted despite its ability to), aside from likely as a way to justify the high minimum and to some degree the expenses.
I agree with the views of Winters on a fair amount of things great and small - especially Jardine Matheson - but the fund's performance has not been tremendously noteworthy. He continues to devote a fair amount to the emerging consumer, and while some of those investments have fared well, others (Genting, which I think is a really fascinating company in ways) have not. The energy holdings haven't, either.
I like Winters and agree with a fair amount of his views, but have never quite agreed with the kind of "elevated, boutique-y" status that Wintergreen has bestowed upon itself; it's a long-only, global fund, no more, no less. Performance has been fine enough in comparison to the category, but not great or consistent. I do like the manager, but - for use of a better phrase - have never seen the fund in the light it has been presented in.
I'm not going to criticize you for an apples-to-oranges comparison. On the contrary, let's go with the flow. You took a broad (global) fund and compared it with a fund having a narrower (international EM) fund. We can continue down that path and compare a broad EM fund (SFGIX) with an EM fund having a narrower (Asian) focus - Matthews Asian G&I MACSX.
It's a similar comparison to the one I did above - comparing the performance of a fund manager who left a fund company to start a higher cost fund, with the performance of the old family's fund. The result is similar - the lower cost, established fund did better. (In this case, the time frame is so short - under a year - as to call the comparison into question, though for reasons of time, not because the comparison is between different types of funds.)
Here's the M* chart. For those, like me, who prefer numbers, the bottom line is: SFGIX: up 9.16%, MACSX: up 12.06%, same time frame as you used.
Reply to @msf: I agree. I'm sensitive to it also. SFGIX will need to prove itself over the longer run against top-notch funds like MACSX. But for now, I'm happy.
Comments
As the article notes, Wintergreen's fees are quite high - this is why, though the company invests in some good dividend-paying companies (as indicated in the article), the fund's yield is nevertheless zero - all those dividends are going toward paying the fund's expenses.
Good fund? No doubt. Value fund? Maybe. Worth the high cost? Much less clear.
Sue me.
As for an attractive "deep value" global fund, the closest thing we own is SGIIX which continues to produce. The only NL, low minimum way to access this fund is to buy SGENX-LW at Schwab.
A more growthy global fund to consider would be LSWWX, which has a bond sleeve managed by Dan Fuss.
Kevin
thanks.
http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2012/04/artisan-global-value-artgx-may-2012-update/
And, forgive me for this: I looked to see if J.R. BRANDSTRADER was a paid shill for WGRNX, but could find nothing implicating on internet.
I agree with the views of Winters on a fair amount of things great and small - especially Jardine Matheson - but the fund's performance has not been tremendously noteworthy. He continues to devote a fair amount to the emerging consumer, and while some of those investments have fared well, others (Genting, which I think is a really fascinating company in ways) have not. The energy holdings haven't, either.
I like Winters and agree with a fair amount of his views, but have never quite agreed with the kind of "elevated, boutique-y" status that Wintergreen has bestowed upon itself; it's a long-only, global fund, no more, no less. Performance has been fine enough in comparison to the category, but not great or consistent. I do like the manager, but - for use of a better phrase - have never seen the fund in the light it has been presented in.
I'm not going to criticize you for an apples-to-oranges comparison. On the contrary, let's go with the flow. You took a broad (global) fund and compared it with a fund having a narrower (international EM) fund. We can continue down that path and compare a broad EM fund (SFGIX) with an EM fund having a narrower (Asian) focus - Matthews Asian G&I MACSX.
It's a similar comparison to the one I did above - comparing the performance of a fund manager who left a fund company to start a higher cost fund, with the performance of the old family's fund. The result is similar - the lower cost, established fund did better. (In this case, the time frame is so short - under a year - as to call the comparison into question, though for reasons of time, not because the comparison is between different types of funds.)
Here's the M* chart. For those, like me, who prefer numbers, the bottom line is:
SFGIX: up 9.16%, MACSX: up 12.06%, same time frame as you used.